DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN JENAYAH NO: N-06B-55-09/2016 [RAYUAN JENAYAH NEGERI SEMBILAN : 42LB(A)-21 & 22-04/2015]
|
|
- Beverly Sutton
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN JENAYAH NO: N-06B-55-09/2016 [RAYUAN JENAYAH NEGERI SEMBILAN : 42LB(A)-21 & 22-04/2015] ANTARA PENDAKWA RAYA PERAYU DAN KAMALANATHAN RESPONDEN CORAM: MOHTARUDIN BIN BAKI, JCA VERNON ONG LAM KIAT, JCA HARMINDAR SINGH DHALIWAL, JCA GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT INTRODUCTION [1] The prosecution s appeal relates to the decision of the High Court dismissing the prosecution s appeal against the decision of the Sessions Court in acquitting and discharging the respondent at the close of the prosecution case. [2] After hearing of submission, we heard and allowed the appeal by a majority decision, with my learned brother Justice Mohtarudin Baki and I
2 being in the majority whilst our learned brother Justice Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal dissented. This then is our majority judgment. [3] The respondent was charged with five counts under s 8(1)(c)(iii) of the Official Secrets Act 1972 (OSA 1972) with having possession in his Samsung Galaxy Note 2 smartphone between to the following documents, to wit: i. kertas soalan Bahasa Tamil-Penulisan 037 Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah 2014 ; ii. kertas soalan sains 018/1 Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah 2014 ; iii. kertas soalan Matematik 035/2 Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah 2014 ; iv. kertas soalan Matematik 015/1 Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah 2014 : and v. kertas soalan Bahasa Tamil-Pemahaman Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah (hereinafter referred to collectively as 2014 UPSR examination papers ) THE SALIENT FACTS [4] The brief facts as found by the Sessions Court judge is as follows: Page 2 of 15
3 (a) Upon being informed by PW11 and upon making comparisons PW12 made a police report on the leakage of the UPSR 2014 Science question paper on (Exhibit P32); (b) Investigations were conducted by PW15 and the accused was arrested by PW1 on at his house nombor No 591, Jalan Bukit Gelena 13, Taman Bukit Galena, Fasa 4, Negeri Sembilan. A Samsung Note 2 handphone (Exhibit P2) was seized from the accused. The arrest and seizure report is produced as Exhibit p1. PW9 confirmed that the telephone number is registered under the accused name; (c) One Prem Kumar a/l Padelrangam (Prem Kumar) was arrested by PW4 and a IPhone (Exhibit P8) was seized from him. PW8 confirmed that telephone number was registered under Prem Kumar s name; (d) PW3 had examined the accused s handphone (P2) and found one image in P2. At the outset it must however be pointed out that this image is not the subject matter of any of the charges against the accused. PW3 s report is marked as Exhibit P22; (e) PW3 had also examined Prem Kumar s handphone (P8) and found that the images in P8 (offending images in P8) were substantially similar to the following actual UPSR question papers: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) Bahasa Tamil Penulisan O37 (Exhibit P19); Science 018/1 (Exhibit P20); Mathematic 035/2 (Exhibit P17); Mathematic 015/1 (Exhibit P16); and Bahasa Tamil Pemahaman 036 (Exhibit P18); Page 3 of 15
4 (f) according to PW3 the images in P8 were shared by whatsapp groups and there were 3 whatsapp communications, including communications from the accused s telephone. PW3 s report on P8 is marked as Exhibit P21. Prem Kumar, a vital prosecution s witness was not called to testify in this trial; (g) according to PW12, she had been appointed by the Minister of Education Malaysia to classify official documents, information and material as official secret and that the UPSR 2014 question papers had been classified as confidential (Sulit) by her and registered in the Buku Daftar Rahsia Rasmi (Exhibit P31). The certificate of appointment by the Minister was produced and after strong objections by the learned defence counsel was marked as ID29; and (h) according to the UPSR Time table (Exhibit P30) (i) Bahasa Tamil penulisan 037 was scheduled on from noon to 1.30 pm; (ii) Science 018/1 was scheduled on from 8.15 am to 9.15 am; (iii) Mathematics 035/2 was scheduled on from noon to 1.00 pm; (iv) Mathematics 015/1 was scheduled on from 8.15 am to 9.15 am; and (v) Bahasa Tamil pemahaman 036 was scheduled on from am to m. DECISION OF THE SESSIONS COURT JUDGE [5] The Sessions Court judge (trial judge) found that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case in respect of all the charges Page 4 of 15
5 against the respondent. The following were inter alia the basis of the trial judge s findings: i. The prosecution failed to prove the documents specified in the charges (Exhibits P16 P20) are official secret; ii. The classification of the 2014 UPSR examination papers as official secret by PW12 is null and void and of no effect as PW12 s appointment is not in accordance with s 2B of the OSA 1972; iii. The appointment certificate of PW12 (ID29) by the Minister of Education is not authenticated and therefore inadmissible; iv. That PW12 was not a reliable and credible witness; v. That the non-calling of the Minister who issued ID29 is fatal to the prosecution s case and therefore adverse presumption under s 114(g) of the Evidence Act is invoked; vi. That the prosecution failed to prove that the respondent had physical possession of Exhibits P16 P20 question papers; vii. That the respondent did not have the prerequisite knowledge (mens rea) nor was he in a position to acquire any knowledge that the offending images in P8 were linked to the 2014 UPSR examination papers; and Page 5 of 15
6 viii. That there is no evidence to show that the respondent had obtained the Exhibit P16 P20 question papers as per the offending images in P8 and had retained them in contravention of the OSA [6] On appeal, the High Court concurred with the findings of the trial judge, hence the prosecutions appeal to this Court. SUBMISSION OF COUNSEL [7] Learned DPP submitted on two main issues. The first related to the question of whether PW12 is a person who is empowered to classify documents as official secret. The second issue relates to the elements of the offence under s 8(1) of the OSA [8] On the first issue, learned DPP argued that PW12 is a public officer designated as the director of the Malaysian Examination Board (MEB). As such, PW12 is a person charged with responsibility of examinations in Malaysia within the meaning of s 16A of the OSA PW12 is directly empowered to regularise all affairs pertaining to examination and examination papers nationwide. Therefore, as mandated by s 16A, even without appointment as a classifying officer, PW12 can in her very capacity as the director of the MEB certify documents as official secret. [9] Insofar as the certificate of appointment (exhibit ID29) appointing PW12 by the then Education Minister is concerned, learned DPP argued that ID29 is a public document by virtue of s 74 read together with s 78(1)(a)(ii) & (iii) of the Evidence Act 1950 renders ID29 a public document whereby the need to call the maker is dispensed with (PP v Page 6 of 15
7 Hoo Chee Keong [1997] 4 MLJ 451; Syarikat Jengka Sdn Bhd v Abdul Rashid Bin Harun [1981] 1 MLJ 201 (FC)). [10] On the second issue, learned DPP argued that there are four elements of the offence under s 8(1) of the OSA First, that the documents specified in the charges are official secret. Second, the respondent has in his possession the offending documents. Third, the offending documents were obtained by the respondent in contravention of the OSA And, fourth the respondent retained the offending documents when he had no right to retain them. [11] The documents forming the subject matter of the charges are in the form of whatsapp images in Prem Kumar s handphone P8. The evidence of SP3 and SP4 together with the data analysis (Exhibit P21) made by SKMM confirm that the offending images found in P8 was sent to MHS Ipoh Whatsapp Group from the respondent s handphone P2. SP3 who conducted an analysis found that the Whatsapp conversations contained 67 images comprising of pages of the documents particularised in the five charges. The images were identified and marked as the following exhibits: P16 15 images of Kertas Matematik 015/1 P17 10 images of Kertas Matematik 035/2 P18 22 images of Kertas Bahasa Tamil Pemahaman 036 P19 4 images of Kertas Bahasa Tamil Penulisan 037 P20 16 images of Kertas Sains 018 [12] Learned DPP argued that even though none of the offending images were found in the handphone of the respondent, the evidence clearly shows that all 67 images came from one source i.e. the respondent s Page 7 of 15
8 handphone. The evidence of SP9 further confirmed that handphone nos and were registered under the respondent s and Prem Kumar s names respectively. As such, it was argued that there is a strong nexus implicating the respondent (Lee Wang Fatt v PP [2014] 1 LNS 1270). [13] Learned DPP also argued that it can be inferred that the respondent had prerequisite knowledge and thus mens rea possession of the offending images before sending it to Prem Kumar because (i) the images were obtained and retained by the respondent and are identical to the actual UPSR 2014 examination papers, (ii) the images were sent over a period of two days, (iii) the images were sent on and which was just prior to the UPSR examination dates, and (iv) the conduct of the respondent deleting the images in his handphone. As such, the respondent has the duty to explain his conduct (s 8 of the Evidence Act 1950; Parlan Dadeh v PP [2009] 1 CLJ 717; Khairuddin Hassan v PP [2010] 7 CLJ 129). Further, the respondent cannot avail himself as an innocent recipient (Dzulkifli Abdul Hamid v PP [1980] 1 LNS 91; Frederick Tam Im Kian v PP [1986] 1 LNS 104). Accordingly, it was argued that the element of obtaining and retaining are closely linked tot fact that the respondent has had possession of the images of the examination papers. As such, the trial judge erred in holding that the prosecution has failed to prove that the respondent had knowledge of the existence of the images or had possession of the same. The offence was committed by the respondent at the material time when he had in his possession the images he had obtained in contravention of the OSA 1972 and retained it in his handphone and subsequently sending the images via whatsapp group knowingly that it was the UPSR examination papers. SP3 the forensic analyst from SKMM explained that the fact that none of Page 8 of 15
9 the images were found in the respondent s handphone could be due to the images being deleted and thereafter overridden so that there is nothing left to extract in the handphone. As such, the fact that nothing was found in the respondent s handphone does not negate the fact that the single source of the images came from the respondent s handphone. [14] The main points taken by learned counsel for the respondent are as follows. First, the certificate of appointment ID29 is inadmissible because it was not signed by the Minister. As such, the adverse inference under s 114(g) should be invoked for the failure to call the Minster or the special officer of the Minister. Further, as ID29 was not gazetted, the court cannot take judicial notice of ID29. [15] Second, the documents classified by PW12 as official secret according to the register of official secret (Exhibit P31) were only drafts of the UPSR examination papers and not the final UPSR examination papers. PW12 did not give any explanation as to why there were additional signatures affixed on the register. [16] Third, there is a gap in the prosecution case because Prem Kumar was an important witness and he was not called to testify (Abdullah Zawawi v PP [1985] 2 MLJ 16 (SC)). Further, there is no evidence to show that the respondent had possession of the images [17] Lastly, learned counsel argued that s 16A is inconsistent with the interpretation of official secret in s 2 of the OSA 1972 and that as such s 16A is obnoxious, draconian and oppressive. Therefore, he argued s 16A, is void to the extent of the inconsistency (Mohammad Ezam Mohd Nor v PP [2004] 2 CLJ 595). Page 9 of 15
10 DECISION [18] Upon a perusal of the appeal record and after hearing of submission of counsel, we are in agreement with the submission of learned DPP. We of the considered view that the only real issue before the Court relates to the question of whether the final 2014 UPSR examination papers pursuant to the five charges are official secret. The point taken by counsel is that only the drafts of the UPSR examination papers were classified by PW12. In fact, this point was taken by the trial judge in the following words at para. 43 of the trial judge s written judgment which is as follows: 43. It is needless to say that the date when Exhibits P16 to 20 were classified is very pertinent to the charge. Exhibits P16 to 20 are certainly not the first version (sic) that were sent to the printers for printing as admitted by PW12. Each amended copy would necessarily give birth to a fresh document and would require a fresh classification under the OSA in order to be protected as official secret. In this case the prosecution has failed to establish on a prima facie evidence that the final amended question papers in the form of Exhibits P16 to 20 were classified as official secret before the dates specified in the charge against the accused. (Emphasis added) [19] The words official secret and document are defined under s 2 of the OSA 1972 as follows: official secret means any document specified in the Schedule and any information and material relating thereto and includes any other official document, information and material as may be classified as Top Secret, Secret. Confidential or Restricted, as the case may be, by a Minister, the Menteri Besar or Chief Minister of a State or such public officer appointed under s 2B; Page 10 of 15
11 document includes, in addition to a document in writing and part of a document (a) any map, plan, model, graph or drawing; (b) any photograph; (c) any disc, tape, sound track or other device in which sound or other data (not being visual images) are embodied so as to be capable (with or without the aid of some other component) of being reproduced therefrom; and (d) any film, negative, tape or other device in which one or more visual images are embodied so as to be capable (as aforesaid) of being reproduced therefrom; [20] The word document is also defined to denote any matter expressed or described upon any substance by means of letters figures of marks, or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, as evidence for that matter (s 29 of the Penal Code; s 3 of the Evidence Act 1950; s 3 of the Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967). [21] According to the Daftar Suratan Rahsia Rasmi Di Luar Jadual Akta Rahsia Rasmi 1972 Dan Berhubungan Dengannya Yang Dikelaskan (exhibit P31) the documents in question were classified by PW12 in the following format: Bil. Tarikh Rujukan Perkara Pengelasan Dikelaskan Tandatangan Catatan Surat Surat Oleh UPSR /1 Mathematics 2 SK (signature) SULIT DR. NA IMAH BT ISHAK (tandatangan) Page 11 of 15
12 Pengarah Lembaga Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia Science SK SULIT DR. NA IMAH (tandatangan) (signature) BT ISHAK Pengarah Lembaga Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia /2(P.P.) P.P Mathematics 2 SULIT DR. NA IMAH (tandatangan) SJKT BT ISHAK Pengarah Lembaga Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia Bahasa Tamil SULIT DR. NA IMAH (tandatangan) Pemahaman SJKT (signature) BT ISHAK Pengarah Lembaga Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia Bahasa Tamil SULIT DR. NA IMAH (tandatangan) Penulisan SJKT BT ISHAK (signature) Pengarah Lembaga Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia Page 12 of 15
13 (P/P) P.I. Bahasa Tamil SULIT DR. NA IMAH (tandatangan) Penulisan SJKT BT ISHAK Pengarah Lembaga Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia [22] In our view, as the documents in question is the 2014 UPSR examination paper, it is the 2014 UPSR examination paper that were classified and not the draft or the paper on which it is created. For instance, when PW12 classified the document described as Mathematics 035/2 examination paper on , it was the Mathematics 035/2 examination paper which was classified. We say this in the light of the meaning ascribed to the words official secret includes any information and material relating thereto. Any information and material relating to the said Mathematics 035/2 examination paper would include the information and material contained in all initial and subsequent drafts of the said examination paper and the final version of the examination paper. [23] In the ordinary course of work, the making of a document begins with the creation of an initial draft containing such information and material relating to the document in question. In the case of the initial draft for the Mathematics examination paper for instance, the initial draft would contain instructions, mathematics questions graphs, drawings and other material. Any revisions or amendments to the instructions, questions and materials in the initial draft and subsequent drafts would relate to the Mathematics examination paper i.e. such information and material relating thereto. Page 13 of 15
14 [24] Accordingly, we hold that a document which has been classified includes any information and material contained in an initial draft of the document, which contents are official secret once the document has been classified, and the official secret attaches to the any information and material of all subsequent drafts including the final version of the document. [25] To hold otherwise would lead to absurdity as it would in effect require a certifying public officer to classify each and every draft of a document including the final version of the document. It would lead to the further absurdity that if the subsequent drafts and final version are not classified individually, then the information and material in the subsequent and final drafts will not fall to be protected as official secret. Therefore, we do not think that it is necessary for PW12 to classify each and every draft and the final version of the UPSR examination paper. On the established facts, it is clear that PW12 intended to classify the UPSR examination papers and that the classification thereof includes the information and material in the initial and subsequent drafts and final version of the UPSR examination papers. As such, we hold that the final UPSR examination papers in question are official secret. [26] We are therefore constrained to hold that the trial judge and High Court judge misdirected themselves on the law and on the facts. On the totality of the evidence, we agree with submission of learned DPP that there is ample evidence to establish a prima facie case on all the five charges. Page 14 of 15
15 [27] For the foregoing reasons, we set aside the orders of the High Court and the Sessions Court and ordered the respondent to enter on his defence on the five charges. sgd (Vernon Ong) Judge Court Of Appeal Malaysia Dated : 1 st August 2017 Counsel: For the Appellant: Nadia Hanim Mohd Tajuddin Timbalan Pendakwa Raya Bahagian Perbicaraan dan Rayuan Jabatan Peguam Negara For the Respondent: M. Kula Segaran Messrs Kula & Associates Page 15 of 15
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA DI PUTRAJAYA BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN RAYUAN JENAYAH NO: J-05(LB)-54-01/2016 ANTARA TAN CHOW CHEANG PERAYU DAN
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA DI PUTRAJAYA BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN RAYUAN JENAYAH NO: J-05(LB)-54-01/2016 ANTARA TAN CHOW CHEANG PERAYU DAN PENDAKWA RAYA RESPONDEN (Dalam Perkara Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya di
More informationHeld: Per Abdul Hamid Mohamad JCA
1 PP v. HO HUAH TEONG COURT OF APPEAL, KUALA LUMPUR LAMIN MOHD YUNUS, PCA; ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD, JCA; ABDUL KADIR SULAIMAN, JCA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: P09-3-97 3 AUGUST 2001 [2001] 3 CLJ 722 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE:
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR (BAHAGIAN RAYUAN DAN KUASA-KUASA KHAS) PERMOHONAN SEMAKAN KEHAKIMAN: WA /2017
DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR (BAHAGIAN RAYUAN DAN KUASA-KUASA KHAS) PERMOHONAN SEMAKAN KEHAKIMAN: WA-25-193-07/2017 Dalam perkara sesuatu keputusan Ketua Pengarah Kastam dan Eksais yang
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: P ANTARA SAUL HAMID B. PAKIR MOHAMAD... PERAYU DAN
1 DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: P-01-61-1999 ANTARA SAUL HAMID B. PAKIR MOHAMAD... PERAYU DAN 1. INSPEKTOR ABDUL FATAH B. ABDUL RAHMAN RESPONDEN- 2. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA DI PUTRAJAYA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. B /2014 ANTARA PROFIL SAUJANA (M) SDN BHD DAN
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA DI PUTRAJAYA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. B-02-857-05/2014 PROFIL SAUJANA (M) SDN BHD AZABAR HOLDINGS ANTARA DAN PERAYU RESPONDEN (DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI DI SHAH
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI PULAU PINANG RAYUAN JENAYAH KES NO : 42S ANTARA KHOR SOCK KHIM LAWAN PENDAKWA RAYA JUDGMENT
DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI PULAU PINANG RAYUAN JENAYAH KES NO : 42S-4-02-2016 ANTARA KHOR SOCK KHIM LAWAN PENDAKWA RAYA JUDGMENT INTRODUCTION 1. This is an appeal by the Appellant against the decision
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUSASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUSASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W-02-2133-2011 ANTARA BOUNTY DYNAMICS SDN BHD (dahulunya dikenali sebagai MEDA DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD) PERAYU DAN CHOW TAT MING DAN 175
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA [BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN] RAYUAN SIVIL NO. J-01(IM) /2014 ANTARA
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA [BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN] RAYUAN SIVIL NO. J-01(IM)-296-08/2014 ANTARA KETUA PENGARAH INSOLVENSI, bagi Harta Goh Ah Kai, Bankrap PERAYU DAN 1. GOH AH KAI RESPONDEN- 2. PARKWAY
More informationRAYUAN SIVIL NO. W Antara. 5. Kamil Ahmad Merican. Perayu-Perayu. Dan. Didengar bersama-sama dengan
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-02-1003-2009 Antara 1. Ace Heights (M) Sdn. Bhd. (No. Syarikat 400572 D) 2. Dato Abdullah B. Mohd Yusof 3. Abbas Bin Yaacob 4. Harith
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO. W-02(C)(A) /2016 BETWEEN
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO. W-02(C)(A)-1400-08/2016 BETWEEN 1. JAN DE NUL (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD... APPELLANTS (COMPANY NO. 414113-K) 2. JAN DE NUL GROUP (SOFIDRA
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA DI PUTRAJAYA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W-02(IM)(NCC) ANTARA
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA DI PUTRAJAYA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W-02(IM)(NCC)-3609-2010 ANTARA KEJURUTERAAN BINTAI KINDENKO SDN. BHD.. PERAYU DAN (1) NAM FATT CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD (No:
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA [BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN] RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-03(IM)-85-07/2014 ANTARA DAN MEDTRONIC AUSTRALASIA PTY LIMITED
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA [BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN] RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-03(IM)-85-07/2014 ANTARA AZMAN BIN JUFRI DAN MEDTRONIC AUSTRALASIA PTY LIMITED PERAYU RESPONDEN (Dalam Perkara Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya
More informationIN THE FEDERAL COURT OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO: 01(i)-15-04/2014(C) BETWEEN SERUAN GEMILANG MAKMUR SDN BHD AND SUMMARY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO: 01(i)-15-04/2014(C) BETWEEN SERUAN GEMILANG MAKMUR SDN BHD.. APPELLANT AND 1. KERAJAAN NEGERI PAHANG DARUL MAKMUR 2. PENGARAH
More informationCHAPTER 3.04 SAINT LUCIA. Revised Edition Showing the law as at 31 December 2008
SAINT LUCIA CHAPTER 3.04 PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT Revised Edition Showing the law as at 31 December 2008 This is a revised edition of the law, prepared by the Law Revision Commissioner under the authority
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W ANTARA DAN
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W 02 1329 2005 ANTARA UNITED OVERSEAS BANK (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD DAN UJA SDN BHD PERAYU RESPONDEN (Dalam perkara Saman Pemula No. S3-24-2162-2004
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI SHAH ALAM DALAM NEGERI SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN RAYUAN SIVIL NO.: 11ANCVC-44-08/2016 ANTARA
DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI SHAH ALAM DALAM NEGERI SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN RAYUAN SIVIL NO.: 11ANCVC-44-08/2016 ANTARA YEOH LIANG CHUAN (No. K/P: 481027-07-5351). PERAYU DAN JAGJIT SINGH (mendakwa sebagai
More informationMALAYSIA IN HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KOTA KINABALU BETWEEN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR APPELLANT AND JUHINOL BIN LIMBUIS RESPONDENT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 MALAYSIA IN HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KOTA KINABALU BETWEEN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR APPELLANT AND JUHINOL BIN LIMBUIS RESPONDENT 10 11 12 13 (KOTA KINABALU SESSIONS COURT CRIMINAL
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-02 [IM] [NCVC] /2014 RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-02 [IM] [NCVC] /2014
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-02 [IM] [NCVC] 1840-10/2014 RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-02 [IM] [NCVC] 1810-10/2014 ANTARA 1. AMBER COURT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION 2. TEE SOONG
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: J /2012 ANTARA
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: J-02-2627-11/2012 ANTARA MILLENNIUM MEDICARE SERVICES Mendakwa sebagai firma PERAYU DAN NAGADEVAN A/L MAHALINGAM RESPONDEN (Dalam Perkara
More informationBatu Kemas Industri Sdn Bhd v Kerajaan Malaysia & Anor
Batu Kemas Industri Sdn Bhd v Kerajaan Malaysia & Anor Batu Kemas Industri Sdn Bhd v Kerajaan Malaysia & Anor COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA CIVIL APPEAL NO: A 01 16 01/2013 MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH JCA, VERNON
More informationANALYSIS. 1980, No. 2. An Act to amend the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1908 [4 July BE IT ENACTED by the General Assembly of New Zealand
1980, No. 2 Commissions of Inquiry Amendment 5 Title 1. Short Title 2. Interpretation 3. Commissioners' powers 4. New sections substituted 4A. Persons entitled to be heard 4B. Evidence 40. Powers of investigation
More informationJUDGMENT. Low Hop Bing JCA:
DANCOM TELECOMMUNICATION (M) SDN BHD v. UNIASIA GENERAL INSURANCE BHD COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA LOW HOP BING JCA, HELILIAH YUSOF JCA, ABDUL MALIK ISHAK JCA [CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-02-259-2005] 1 AUGUST 2008
More informationExtradition LAWS OF MALAYSIA REPRINT. Act 479 EXTRADITION ACT 1992
Extradition 1 LAWS OF MALAYSIA REPRINT Act 479 EXTRADITION ACT 1992 Incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006 PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LAW REVISION, MALAYSIA UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE
More information(2017) LPELR-42606(CA)
STATE v. ASUNMO & ORS CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Ibadan Judicial Division Holden at Ibadan CHINWE EUGENIA IYIZOBA HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI NONYEREM OKORONKWO ON FRIDAY, 30TH JUNE, 2017 Suit No:
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA AT PUTRAJAYA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: B-05(LB) /2015 (IND) BETWEEN AND AND
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA AT PUTRAJAYA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: B-05(LB)-285-10/2015 (IND) BETWEEN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR APPELLANT AND NI KOMANG YUNINGSIH RESPONDENT AND [IN THE
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) [RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W-02(NCVC)(W) /2013] ANTARA DAN
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) [RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W-02(NCVC)(W)-143-01/2013] ANTARA 1. MUAFAKAT KEKAL SDN BHD 2. PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN PALM SPRING @ DAMANSARA... PERAYU DAN 1. PESURUHJAYA
More informationd) To introduce a new Part on Anti-Camcording to combat camcording activities in a place for the screening of any film or cinematography.
COPYRIGHT COMMITTEE REPORT MALAYSIA 1. Proposals for Changes in Copyright Law in Malaysia There have been proposals to amend the Copyright Act and comments have been given by stakeholders to the proposed
More informationFirst Session Tenth Parliament Republic of Trinidad and Tobago REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO. Act No. 11 of 2010
First Session Tenth Parliament Republic of Trinidad and Tobago REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Act No. 11 of 2010 [L.S.] AN ACT to provide for and about the interception of communications, the acquisition
More informationSYARIAH COURT CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ENACTMENT OF SELANGOR (AMENDMENT) 2003.
SYARIAH COURT CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ENACTMENT OF SELANGOR (AMENDMENT) 2003. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION REPORTED CASES IN CIVIL AND CRIMINAL SUMMONS WARRANT OF ARREST INFORMATION CHARGE CONCLUSION REPORTED CASES
More informationMinister of Human Resources, Malaysia v Diamet Klang (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd and another appeal [2015] 2 AMR 659; [2013] 1 LNS * 1466 (CA)
Legal Updates April 2015 Cases Administrative Law Minister of Human Resources, Malaysia v Diamet Klang (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd and another appeal [2015] 2 AMR 659; [2013] 1 LNS * 1466 (CA) Whether (i) minister
More informationLabuan Offshore Financial Services Authority (Amendment) LAWS OF MALAYSIA. Act A1365
Labuan Offshore Financial Services Authority (Amendment) 1 LAWS OF MALAYSIA Act A1365 LABUAN OFFSHORE FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY (AMENDMENT) ACT 2010 2 Laws of Malaysia ACT A1365 Date of Royal Assent......
More informationHeld: Per Abdul Hamid Mohamad JCA
1 M/S LAKSAMANA REALTY SDN BHD v. GOH ENG HWA COURT OF APPEAL, KUALA LUMPUR ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD, JCA; MOHD NOOR AHMAD, JCA; ABDUL AZIZ MOHAMAD, JCA CIVIL APPEAL NOS: M-02-347-2001, M-02-388-2001 & M-02-530-2001
More informationWong Kian Wah v Ng Kien Boon
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSIA Coram: Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, JCA; Abdul Rahman Sebli, JCA; Mary Lim, JCA Wong Kian Wah v Ng Kien Boon Citation: [2018] MYCA 230 Suit Number: Civil Appeal No. W 02(NCVC)(W)
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ASAL) NO: (B) ANTARA
DALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ASAL) NO: 1-12-2012(B) ANTARA 1. ZI PUBLICATIONS SDN BHD (COMPANY NO. 398106-W) 2. MOHD EZRA BIN MOHD ZAID PEMPETISYEN- PEMPETISYEN DAN KERAJAAN NEGERI
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, MALAYSIA [GUAMAN SIVIL NO: S ] (NO 2) ANTARA
DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, MALAYSIA [GUAMAN SIVIL NO: S-22-868-2008] (NO 2) ANTARA PALM SPRING JMB (SIJIL NO: 0046) Suatu badan yang ditubuhkan di bawah Akta
More informationD.R. 48/96 RANG UNDANG-UNDANG. Suatu Akta untuk meminda Kanun Prosedur Jenayah.
D.R. 48/96 Naskhah Sahih Bahasa Inggeris RANG UNDANG-UNDANG b e r n a m a Suatu Akta untuk meminda Kanun Prosedur Jenayah. [ ] MAKA INILAH DIPERBUAT UNDANG-UNDANG oleh Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-pertuan
More informationTHE JUDICIAL CONTROL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
29 th LAWASIA CONFERENCE 12 15 August 2016 Colombo, Sri Lanka THE JUDICIAL CONTROL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION Steven Thiru President Malaysian Bar The Malaysian judiciary, like their English counter-parts,
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO (P) ANTARA
DALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. 02-4-2004(P) ANTARA 1. JOCELINE TAN POH CHOO 2. THE GROUP EDITOR, NEW STRAITS TIMES 3. THE NEW STRAITS TIMES PRESS (M) BHD Perayu-
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA RAYUAN SIVIL NO: /2012(W) ANTARA SURUHANJAYA SEKURITI... PERAYU DAN DATUK ISHAK BIN ISMAIL...
1 DALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: 02-21-04/12(W) ANTARA SURUHANJAYA SEKURITI... PERAYU DAN DATUK ISHAK BIN ISMAIL... RESPONDEN 1 [DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA
More informationBELIZE EVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 95 REVISED EDITION 2000 SHOWING THE LAW AS AT 31ST DECEMBER, 2000
BELIZE EVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 95 REVISED EDITION 2000 SHOWING THE LAW AS AT 31ST DECEMBER, 2000 This is a revised edition of the law, prepared by the Law Revision Commissioner under the authority of the
More informationEVIDENCE ACT LAWS OF GRENADA REVISED EDITION CHAPTER 92. Amended by Act No. 7 of 1968 Act No. 12 of 1990 Act No. 9 of 1995 Act No.
LAWS OF GRENADA REVISED EDITION EVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 92 Amended by Act No. 7 of 1968 Act No. 12 of 1990 Act No. 9 of 1995 Act No. 26 of 2000 Printed and published with the authority of the Government of
More informationEVIDENCE CHAPTER 65 EVIDENCE
[CH.65 1 LIST OF AUTHORISED PAGES 1-2 LRO 1/2008 3-8 Original 9-10 LRO 1/2008 11-22 Original 23-24 LRO 1/2008 25-77 Original CHAPTER 65 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION PART I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title.
More informationHBT 203 Bahasa, Undang-Undang dan Penterjemahan II
No. Tempat Duduk UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA Peperiksaan Semester Kedua Sidang Akademik 2003/2004 Februari/Mac 2004 HBT 203 Bahasa, Undang-Undang dan Penterjemahan II Masa : 3 jam ARAHAN KEPADA CALON: 1.
More informationKAEDAH-KAEDAH MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN (PINDAAN) 2011 RULES OF THE FEDERAL COURT (AMENDMENT) 2011 DISIARKAN OLEH/ JABATAN PEGUAM NEGARA/ PUBLISHED BY
WARTA KERAJAAN PERSE EKUTUAN 29 Jun 2011 29 June 2011 P.U. (A) 208 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GAZETTE KAEDAH-KAEDAH MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN (PINDAAN) 2011 RULES OF THE FEDERAL COURT (AMENDMENT) 2011 DISIARKAN OLEH/
More informationMAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI SHAH ALAM DALAM NEGERI SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN GUAMAN SIVIL NO: 22C-20-09/2014 ANTARA PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI SELANGOR DAN
MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI SHAH ALAM DALAM NEGERI SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN GUAMAN SIVIL NO: 22C--09/14 ANTARA PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI SELANGOR PLAINTIF DAN 1. PROJEK LEBUHRAYA USAHASAMA BERHAD (No. Syarikat
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR (BAHAGIAN RAYUAN DAN KUASA-KUASA KHAS) PERMOHONAN UNTUK SEMAKAN KEHAKIMAN NO: /2015
DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR (BAHAGIAN RAYUAN DAN KUASA-KUASA KHAS) PERMOHONAN UNTUK SEMAKAN KEHAKIMAN NO: 25-212-07/2015 Antara Dalam Perkara Bahagian II, Artikel 5, Perlembagaan Persekutuan
More informationClass Actions in Malaysia: An Update on the Country Report. Globalization of Class Actions: Oxford Symposium Oxford, England December, 2008
Class Actions in Malaysia: An Update on the Country Report Globalization of Class Actions: Oxford Symposium Oxford, England 11 12 December, 2008 Dr Yeow-Choy Choong and Sujata Balan Introduction This is
More informationDRAFT COPYRIGHT REGULATIONS 2015 ARRANGEMENT OF REGULATIONS. PART I Preliminary and Definitions. The Copyright Register PART III
DRAFT COPYRIGHT REGULATIONS 2015 ARRANGEMENT OF REGULATIONS PART I Preliminary and Definitions Reg. 1: Citation and Commencement Reg. 2: Interpretation Reg. 3: Forms Reg. 4: Fees PART II The Copyright
More informationTitle 10 Laws of Bermuda Item 12 BERMUDA 1973 : 48 OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS ACT 1973 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. [preamble and words of enactment omitted]
BERMUDA 1973 : 48 OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS ACT 1973 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 1 Interpretation 2 Obscenity 3 Offences involving obscene articles 3A Offence of advertising obscene article 4 Functions of Broadcasting
More informationChairperson : Suraj Singh
SUB-COMMITTEE REPORTS CRIMINAL LAW COURT LIAISON Chairperson : Suraj Singh Deputy Chairperson : MK Thas Suraj Singh Members : Salehuddin B. Saidin Mohd Haaziq Pillay Bin Abdullah Nagarajan a/l Periasamy
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. 02(i)-67-09/2012 (W) ANTARA DAN
1 DALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. 02(i)-67-09/2012 (W) ANTARA AV ASIA SDN BHD Perayu DAN MEASAT BROADCAST NETWORK SYSTEMS SDN BHD Responden (Dalam Mahkamah Rayuan
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO: K-01(NCVC)(W)-10-01/2014 BETWEEN
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO: K-01(NCVC)(W)-10-01/2014 BETWEEN PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI KEDAH APPELLANT AND CBH RUBBER SDN. BHD. (COMPANY NO: 945835-A)
More informationLegal Supplement Part A to the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, Vol. 44, No. 167, 16th September, 2005
Legal Supplement Part A to the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, Vol. 44, No. 167, 16th September, 2005 Third Session Eighth Parliament Republic of Trinidad and Tobago REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Act No.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No of 2015) Versus
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1525 OF 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 9151 of 2015) Shamsher Singh Verma Appellant Versus State of
More informationFIREARMS (INCREASED PENALTIES) ACT 1971
LAWS OF MALAYSIA REPRINT Act 37 FIREARMS (INCREASED PENALTIES) ACT 1971 Incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006 PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LAW REVISION, MALAYSIA UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF
More informationPilecon Engineering Bhd ABDUL KADIR SULAIMAN, JCA ARIFIN ZAKARIA, JCA NIK HASHIM NIK AB. RAHMAN, JCA 23 FEBRUARY 2007
COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA Bintulu Development Authority - vs - Coram Pilecon Engineering Bhd ABDUL KADIR SULAIMAN, JCA ARIFIN ZAKARIA, JCA NIK HASHIM NIK AB. RAHMAN, JCA 23 FEBRUARY 2007 Judgment of the
More informationBERMUDA PARLIAMENT ACT : 19
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA PARLIAMENT ACT 1957 1957 : 19 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Arrangement of Act [omitted] Interpretation Savings PART I PART II IMMUNITIES
More informationMEASAT GLOBAL BERHAD (Incorporated in Malaysia Company No.: 2866-T)
MEASAT GLOBAL BERHAD (Incorporated in Malaysia Company No.: 2866-T) NOTICE OF FIFTIETH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fiftieth Annual General Meeting of MEASAT Global Berhad will
More informationRULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 3:13. DEPOSITIONS; DISCOVERY
RULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 3:13. DEPOSITIONS; DISCOVERY 3:13-1. [Deleted] Note: Source-R.R. 3:5-3(a)(b). Paragraph designations and paragraph (b) adopted July 16, 1979 to
More informationKAEDAH-KAEDAH MAHKAMAH TINGGI (PINDAAN) 2011 RULES OF THE HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) 2011 DISIARKAN OLEH/ JABATAN PEGUAM NEGARA/ PUBLISHED BY
WARTA KERAJAAN PERSEKUTUAN 29 Jun 2011 29 June 2011 P.U. (A) 210 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GAZETTE KAEDAH-KAEDAH MAHKAMAH TINGGI (PINDAAN) 2011 RULES OF THE HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) 2011 DISIARKAN OLEH/ PUBLISHED
More informationINDICTABLE OFFENCES (PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY) ACT
INDICTABLE OFFENCES (PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY) ACT CHAPTER 12:01 48 of 1920 5 of 1923 21 of 1936 14 of 1939 25 of 1948 1 of 1955 10 of 1961 11 of 1961 29 of 1977 45 of 1979 Act 12 of 1917 Amended by *See Note
More informationDIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DIVISION Chief Minister's Department
1 2 MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KUCHING APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW NO: KCH-13JR-1-11 ln the matter of the decision of the District Officer to terminate the service of the Applicant
More informationBETWEEN. LAI CHENG OOI (f) (the executrix of the estate of Lee Tain Lee Thien Chiung, deceased) AND
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA AT PUTRAJAYA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO. S-01(IM)(NCVC)-145-04/2016 [Kota Kinabalu High Court OS No. BKI-24NCVC-44/5-2015] BETWEEN LAI CHENG OOI (f) (the
More informationAustralia-Malaysia Extradition Treaty
The Asian Development Bank and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development do not guarantee the accuracy of this document and accept no responsibility whatsoever for any consequences of
More informationTHE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY
THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, 1999 Section 1. Short title 2. Commencement 3. Object of Act 4. Interpretation 5. Non-application of Act 6. Act binds the State Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY
More informationLegal Aspects of Islamic Finance LCA4592 DR. ZULKIFLI HASAN
Legal Aspects of Islamic Finance LCA4592 DR. ZULKIFLI HASAN Contents n Islamic finance cases n 1987-2002 n 2003-2007 n 2008-2011 1987-2002 n Tinta Press Sdn Berhad v BIMB (1987) 1 MLJ 474; 1 CLJ 474: IJarah
More informationPOWERS AND PRIVILEGES (SENATE AND HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
[CH.8 1 CHAPTER 8 (SENATE AND HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY) SECTION ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. PART II PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF SENATORS AND MEMBERS 3. General
More information87 TRADE DESCRIPTIONS ACT
LAWS OF MALAYSIA REPRINT Act 87 TRADE DESCRIPTIONS ACT 1972 Incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006 PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LAW REVISION, MALAYSIA UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE REVISION
More informationPERATURAN-PERATURAN PERLINDUNGAN DATA PERIBADI (PENGKOMPAUNAN KESALAHAN) 2016 PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION (COMPOUNDING OF OFFENCES) REGULATIONS 2016
WARTA KERAJAAN PERSEKUTUAN 14 Mac 2016 14 March 2016 P.U. (A) 60 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GAZETTE PERATURAN-PERATURAN PERLINDUNGAN DATA PERIBADI (PENGKOMPAUNAN KESALAHAN) 2016 PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION (COMPOUNDING
More informationAIR(SC) 5384; ; JLJR(SC) 131; MPWN(SC) 138; ; SCC
This Product is Licensed to Mohammed Asif Ansari, Rajasthan State Judicial Academy, Jodhpur 2016 0 AIR(SC) 5384; 2016 4 Crimes(SC) 190; 2017 1 JLJR(SC) 131; 2016 3 MPWN(SC) 138; 2016 12 Scale 269; 2017
More informationGovernment Gazette REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. Vol. 473 Cape Town 2 November 2004 No
Government Gazette REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Vol. 473 Cape Town 2 November 2004 No. 26950 THE PRESIDENCY No. 1296 2 November 2004 It is hereby notified that the President has assented to the following Act,
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA DI PUTRAJAYA [BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN] [RAYUAN JENAYAH NO. B /2014] ANTARA DAN
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA DI PUTRAJAYA [BIDANGKUASA RAYUAN] [RAYUAN JENAYAH NO. B-05-133-05/2014] ANTARA PENDAKWA RAYA PERAYU DAN MOHAMMAD JAVAD SABERI GHOLAMREZA RESPONDEN [Dalam Perkara Mahkamah
More informationHIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA, MAIN DIVISION JUDGMENT. In Re: INQUEST REVIEW (RUNDU INQUEST NO 133/2014): FESBERTU VENDA
REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA REPORTABLE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA, MAIN DIVISION JUDGMENT CR No: 28/2015 In Re: INQUEST REVIEW (RUNDU INQUEST NO 133/2014): FESBERTU VENDA HIGH COURT MD REVIEW CASE NO 1449/2015 Neutral
More informationEVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 80 LAWS OF KENYA
LAWS OF KENYA EVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 80 Revised Edition 2012 [2010] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org CAP. 80 [Rev. 2012] CAP.
More informationBETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA AND MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
TREATY BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA AND THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS The Republic of Austria and the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred
More informationThe Tamil Nadu Presevation of Private Forest Act, 1949
The Tamil Nadu Presevation of Private Forest Act, 1949 This document is available at ielrc.org/content/e4901.pdf For further information, visit www.ielrc.org Note: This document is put online by the International
More informationM A L A Y S I A IN THE HIGH COURT OF SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KOTA KINABALU JUDICIAL REVIEW NO. BKI-13NCvC-32/ BETWEEN
M A L A Y S I A IN THE HIGH COURT OF SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KOTA KINABALU JUDICIAL REVIEW NO. BKI-1NCvC-2/-20 BETWEEN PADUAN HEBAT SDN BHD APPLICANT AND THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KOTA KINABALU 1 ST RESPONDENT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT. Crl. M.C. No. 2183/2011. Reserved on: 18th January, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT Crl. M.C. No. 2183/2011 Reserved on: 18th January, 2012 Decided on: 8th February, 2012 JIWAN RAM GUPTA... Petitioner Through:
More informationNumber 12 of 1992 CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1992 REVISED. Updated to 30 May 2018
Number 12 of 1992 CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1992 REVISED Updated to 30 May 2018 This Revised Act is an administrative consolidation of the. It is prepared by the Law Reform Commission in accordance with its
More informationKERALA CIVIL SERVICES (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL & APPEAL) RULES, 1960
1 KERALA CIVIL SERVICES (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL & APPEAL) RULES, 1960 In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the Governor of Kerala hereby makes
More informationTHE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL, 2002
THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL, 2002 A BILL further to amend the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891 and the Information Technology
More informationMUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE ACT
LAWS OF KENYA MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE ACT CHAPTER 75A Revised Edition 2012 [2011] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org [Rev.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT SHAH ALAM IN THE STATE OF SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN [CIVIL SUIT NO: ] BETWEEN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT SHAH ALAM IN THE STATE OF SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN [CIVIL SUIT NO: 22-510-2003] BETWEEN A & AT ADVANCED POWER SYSTEMS SDN BHD... PLAINTIFF AND PERNEC CORPORATION BHD (NO SYARIKAT:
More informationMALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT FEDERAL TERRITORY, LABUAN. CIVIL CASE NO: LBN-24NCvC-6/ BETWEEN SEJATI SDN. BHD..
MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT FEDERAL TERRITORY, LABUAN CIVIL CASE NO: LBN-24NCvC-6/8-2016 BETWEEN SEJATI SDN. BHD.. PLAINTIFF AND DIRECTOR OF LANDS AND SURVEYS.. 1 ST DEFENDANT SABAH
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO.: W-02(IM)(NCC) /2014 BETWEEN
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO.: W-02(IM)(NCC)-676-04/2014 BETWEEN ZAMIL STEEL VIETNAM BUILDINGS CO. LTD. - APPELLANT AND G.T.K. BERHAD (Company No.: 198500-P)
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA Thye Hin Enterprises Sdn Bhd - vs - Daimlerchrysler
Coram COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA Thye Hin Enterprises Sdn Bhd - vs - Daimlerchrysler MOHD GHAZALI JCA NIK HASHIM JCA H.B. LOW J 28 JULY 2004 Judgment Mohd Ghazali JCA (delivering the judgment of the court)
More informationMALAYSIA Trademarks Regulations as amended by PU (A) 47 of 2011 ENTRY INTO FORCE: February 15, 2011
MALAYSIA Trademarks Regulations as amended by PU (A) 47 of 2011 ENTRY INTO FORCE: February 15, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I PRELIMINARY 1. Citation and commencement. 2. Interpretation. 3. Fees. 4. Forms.
More information92 SUBORDINATE COURTS ACT
LAWS OF MALAYSIA REPRINT Act 92 SUBORDINATE COURTS ACT 1948 Incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006 PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LAW REVISION, MALAYSIA UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE REVISION
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. W.P. (C) 218 of 2010 & CM APPL 450/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P. (C) 218 of 2010 & CM APPL 450/2010 Reserved on: 21 st May 2010 Decision on: 02 nd July 2010 BRIG. (RETD.) UJJAL DASGUPTA... Petitioner Through: Mr. Prashant
More information2013 Integrity in Public Life Act ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES Part I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation 3.
`1 2013 Integrity in Public Life Act 24 297 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES Part I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation 3. Application of Act Part II ESTABLISHMENTOF INTEGRITY COMMISSION
More information275 GOVERNMENT FUNDING ACT
Government Funding 1 LAWS OF MALAYSIA REPRINT Act 275 GOVERNMENT FUNDING ACT 1983 Incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006 PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LAW REVISION, MALAYSIA UNDER THE AUTHORITY
More informationAPPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY LICENCE
FORM 28 APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY LICENCE te for applicant: Please affix your photograph here. PART A (to be filled by the applicant) SECTION I: PROFILE Personal Details Title: Name: (as shown in passport)
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 722 OF 2015 (Arising from S.L.P. (Criminal) No.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 722 OF 2015 (Arising from S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 6684/2013) D. T. Virupakshappa Appellant (s) Versus C. Subash
More informationMALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KUCHING SUIT NO II BETWEEN AND
MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KUCHING SUIT NO. 22-74-08-II BETWEEN CMS ENERGY SDN BHD (Company No.34309-A) Level 6, Wisma Mahmud Jalan Sungai Sarawak 930 Kuching, Sarawak Plaintiff
More informationLegal Supplement Part C to the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, Vol. 53, No. 152, 4th December, No. 22 of 2014
Legal Supplement Part C to the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, Vol. 53, No. 152, 4th December, 2014 2002 No. 22 of 2014 Fifth Session Tenth Parliament Republic of Trinidad and Tobago HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
More informationDALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN DI MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-01(C)(A) /2014 ANTARA. CHAIN CYCLE SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: ) DAN
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN DI MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-01(C)(A)-379-09/2014 ANTARA CHAIN CYCLE SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 366266) - PERAYU DAN KERAJAAN MALAYSIA - RESPONDEN ----------------------------------------------------------
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION Judgment reserved on : 26.04.2011 Judgment delivered on : 28.04.2011 R.S.A.No. 109/2007 & CM No. 5092/2007 RAMESH PRAKASH
More informationAudit Oversight Board
FORM 1 Audit Oversight Board Application for registration as an individual auditor If there is insufficient space for any section of the form, you may add attachments and submit as part of this lodgment.
More informationFILMS AND PUBLICATIONS AMENDMENT BILL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA FILMS AND PUBLICATIONS AMENDMENT BILL (As introduced in the National Assembly as a section 7 -Bill; explanatory summary of Bill published in Government Gazette No 2421 of 1 September
More informationTHE PERSONAL DATA (PROTECTION) BILL, 2013
THE PERSONAL DATA (PROTECTION) BILL, 2013 [Long Title] [Preamble] CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title, extent and commencement. (1) This Act may be called the Personal Data (Protection) Act, 2013. (2)
More information